Los Angeles daily herald., 1887-05-07
south California;
i. San Francisco Cal saws :

| The san ffantiSco Cutt says
The Los Angeles papers continue
tn talk about the division OF the State.
The proposition is to draw the line
north OF San Luis Obispo, taking
Kern and Fresno counties into the
new State and leaving Tulare in the
southern extreme of the old State.
The Los Angeles HERALD says ::
'sSouth of Stanislaus the feeling is all
| for division, and this feeling is em-
phatic and pronounced in Fresno and
Kern counties. We believe that the
people of San Luis 0bispo are favor
ably inclined to join us. Ii there is
any adverse feeling there it will soon
disappear when it is shown that the
new State will be power in Congress,
for it will have at least two Repre-
sentatives in the lower House and
two United States Senators. Our
Los Angeles contemporary, of course,
knows that the representation of the
Pacific Coast in the lower House
could not be iDcreasedI by dividing
| the State. California and South Call
ifornia would have no more votes in
! the lower House than California
would have if there were no South
California. The division of the State
would create two new Senators,
which, OF course, would be taken
from the counties composing the
new State. This is the sum of its
gain. 1t is a question, how
ever, if the old States, some
of which have but two Senators
to represent from three to five mil
lions OF people, will fall readily into
the idea OF giving California, with its
one million, two additional Senators.
The Federal Constitution secures to
each State two Senators, and provides
for an equality of State representation
in that body, but the States which
send the largest delegation to the
! lower House look with some disfavor
upon propositions to increase the
number OF Senators who represent
but one or two thousand people. The
CaH has no disposition to restrict the
! liberty of discussion, but there is no
proposition in American politics so
utterly hopeless as this to divide the
State of California. Our population
at present is less than one-fourth Of
that of States that do not think OF
division, and there are really no
causes which give force to the propo-
sition to set of a few southern eoun-
| ties by themselves. The irrigation
question can be solved as intelligently
by the State as by few southern
counties. A great principle under
1 ltac tt,n frr,.ottov, ,.pll,ln,t, rubsah
when reduced to legal enactment,
should apply to the entire State as it
now exists.
The caH sees nothing but San
Francisco in its line OF vision. Allow
ing that we do not gain any in the
lower House-which gain We would
naturally make by the redistrieting OF
the State after the division, as any
one may see who will figure out the
representation. But il We did not,
California and the Pacific coast would
gain two Senators, great advantage
to this section. 1t is. hardly patriotic
in our esteemed contemporary in its
bin dness to all Interests but those
seeming advantages of the Bay City
to appeal to the prejudice of States
alien to our interests on this coast, te
prevent division OF the State
The Call is dead wrong in its view oil
the irrigation problem. The sauce
for the Northern goose in this matter
will not go down with the Southern
gander. The only use our streams
can be put 10 is to fertilize the land
in irrigation. Sacramento and Stock.
ton will hardly consent to the divert
ing OF the waters of .he two great cen
trail navigable streams to such uses
That an intelligent paper like the
Call should be SO badly informed on
this vital subject goes TO show that
the State should be divided.